Nancy Pelosi may not have enough votes for the “robust” public option tied to Medicare rates plus 5%. The Hill has published the official whip count [note: The Hill has now removed this page. Data was copied and posted here] of those House Democrats who oppose the robust public option.
As I’ve pointed out countless times before, a robust public option would have premiums roughly 10%-11% less (according to the CBO and CMS) than typical private insurance. That would be around a $1,400 reduction in premiums for the average family that could choose the robust public option. Forcing Americans to pay roughly $1,400 more a year on health insurance premiums, by denying them the choice of a robust public option, is the first slap in the face.
The second big slap in the face is that robust public option would save the government $85 billion more than a weaker public option (with negotiated rates instead of those based on Medicare). Since Obama set an absurd $900 billion ceiling on the cost of health care reform, most of that $85 billion will need to be made up by reducing affordability tax credits to low- and middle-income families. As Ryan Grim at Huffington Post reports:
The public option tied to Medicare rates saves $110 billion over ten years. Requiring it to negotiate rates only saves $25 billion.
If leadership goes with the negotiated-rate plan, that $85 billion difference will have to come from somewhere to meet President Obama’s ten-year, $900 billion price ceiling. The fattest target is the subsidies to help people afford insurance.
Going with negotiated rates instead of a robust public option will deny American families a choice that would save them roughly $1,400 a year on their health care premiums. But making the public option less robust might also cause the government to reduce the amount of tax credits it can give to low-income and middle-income Americans to help them afford health insurance by roughly 20%. So, not only will American families be denied a much cheaper insurance option, but they will also be given less financial assistance to help them afford health insurance from a selection of more expensive options.
Making the public option less robust will end up costing working class families thousands more each year on health care. That is what the 47 Democrats who are “Nays” on the robust public option are desperately fighting for. They are fighting for a position that they know will make health care dramatically more expensive for millions of Americans.
Update – The Hill is reporting that Majority Whip James Clyburn is disputing the accuracy of the previous published whip count.





55 Comments
Spotlight




Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
Advanced search
So we’re getting hosed on this aren’t we?
Maybe we should find a nice low-population state to which we could all move and suddenly be a liberal majority. Then we can just create a true socialized medicine at the state level – not even single-payer, but a VA-type government run health care and let the rest of Wingnutistan suffer under the Libertarian dystopia they so desperately crave.
the link is broken
And your point is… what?
If they don’t make a visible show of being willing to sell us out to the corporations then they’re out of that corporate money.
Just quietly backstabbing us a la Obama is not an option for them.
it’s called Vermont :D
Here’s another way to say this: working Americans are being asked to subsidize the extravagant life-styles of all the people in the Health Biz. Big Health sucks up a huge percentage of our GDP. Working Americans have been left behind while the rich people at the top took all the gains of the economy. Now that the economy is in the tank, the folks at Big Health want to keep on like nothing changed, when it has dramatically changed for the worse for most people. Why is that fair?
Isn’t there a warmer version somewhere? ;-)
Neil – just now saw it myself in Jon’s post:
All the warm ones are chock-full-o-crackers.
Puerto Rico? (ok – not a state – *yet*).
Also important to remember that the savings for a robust option would be AT LEAST as much as the CBO estimates and probably a lot more. Private insurance takes a lot more than 10% off the top with profits, administration to deny benefits, marketing, etc. I think the robust public option would save consumers at least 20%, so probably upwards of $3,000, and we should make the case for that.
Wouldn’t an opt-in/out system allow for a stronger public option? Moreover, isn’t this a winning strategy politically? Assuming the public option is the wisest use of our health care $ (and I assume that it is), wouldn’t this only strengthen the case nationally for a more robust federal bill in, say, 2012?
I would love nothing more that to continue the strategy of forcing pols to support or oppose HCR. Seems the opt-system would move the debate to the state houses. Texas is turning blue, but this would accelerate the process by at least one election cycle.
It’s so beautiful, you won’t notice how cold it is. :]
I wish I lived there!
This Hill link has more information about individual reps and their position on the health bill.
“don’t taze my donors, bro!”
Good point, and with the rest of America Waziristan ignoring global climate change, it may be nice and warm in the very near future…
The complete lack of Presidential leadership for any kind of public option even this late in the game is the big flashing neon sign with horns blaring and bells chiming that the Obama plan is to kill off the public option or leave it so useless and non-viable that it will be the same as.
There is no 11-dimensional chess going on here. From the start Obama has planned and executed a sellout to BigInsurance, BigPharma, and BigMedical. He thinks that his deals with them and his own cuts in Medicare will control costs. The PO is an obstacle to this. Obama thinks that Americans will love him if he extends the same shit healthcare system to more of them. Democrats are in their own way as divorced from reality as Republicans.
d’oh!
Vermont also has the added advantage of being a small state. The state govt can respond like a PT boat and change course instantly, unlike our aircraft carrier Kawlifornia (where I live) with its officers fighting over the tiller.
Hugh o/t but are you compiling a new list for this POTUS?
Although it’s been great seeing the grassroots force the public option concept into the bill and down the throats of Obama, the Dem establishment, and the MSM, I’ve still never seen any reason to change from wanting the Progressive Block.
The PO was never meant to be a serious part of any legislation, and since they’ve been forced to include it they’re simply going to try to pass some gutted version.
I think the best course would be to block this nasty thing and then start over next year, this time doing it right, not being fooled again, demanding single payer.
The notion that this somehow “can’t” be done, that if health reform fails now (but it’s already failed) we can’t revisit it again for ten years or whatever, is simply mythology with no basis.
“Nothing is written.”
even shorter version: corporate exploitation by a few is killing the american dream for all. exploiting more people doesn’t change the dynamic.
What a good description of our state – made me laugh. I have fingers crossed that we will get a governor who can steer the ship in the right direction
or we’ll end up on the rocks.
that’s compared to typical private insurance AFTER reform. how is the remainder of the reform package predicted to affect costs (premiums and out of pocket expenses) to households?
p.s. i will note that 10%-11% is only, if correct, equivalent to about one typical year’s increase, in effect delaying health insurance costs by one year only. that’s not enough, insurance is now, in 2009, already too expensive. if the reform package you are advocating for does nothing more to control costs, at best, if assumptions are correct (and i have serious doubts about that), mean that in 2013 we will
have the privilegebe required by law to purchase insurance at 2012 prices. and that’s only for those few of us who have access to the exchange.do you think everyone gets this?
No. Have you thought this through? An opt-in just sets another roadblock in the implementation of a public option. Just look at state governments. There is even less political leadership there than in Washington. You are talking about not running one but 50 campaigns to get a public option. Do you understand the political difficulties that poses? If the idea was to leave it to the states with opt-in or opt-out, why all this bother? Legislate a ban on denial of coverage for a prior condition, prohibit rescission, and tell the states to have at it. How would portability work in such a fragmented system?
ain’t it the truth?
o/t I was at a college fair last night…people were shaking their heads over UC shenanigans. I wished I had time to attend the breakout session but only had time for tables. A few friends are thinking about CO and AZ for more affordable options that don’t have their programs on the chopping block every year…
lol. I have turned down a few serious opportunities in the past because they involved relocating to colder climes – now, not so much.
my niece (a public health dentist) just moved to Vermont after years of living in NOLA – claims to be lovin’ it. told her I’d check back in mid january :D
t. r. reid said that the po was used as a bargaining chip to get the insurance companies to agree to community rating, gauranteed issue, etc. my impression is that was the plan all along. but, stupid me, i forgot where i heard him say that, and then i forgot to try to find it again.
duh. will once again try to remember today to look for it so i can give a link. my track record isn’t very good on this though, so don’t hold your breaths.
Let’s not forget the sellout to Big Finance and (if he ups the ante on Afghan-Pak), Big Defense…
Very useful corporate tool, this president is. And he could have been so much more. 11-dimensional chess? Nah. Just plain “checkers”…and I ain’t talkin’ about the dog, either.
If you click on my name there’s a link or here is the url:
http://obamascandalslist.blogspot.com/
I am also in the process of loading in my old Bush scandals list for archival purposes.
I see two possibilities. The first I outlined above. Obama considers his deals with the big healthcare players to be the plan, and a public option is no part of it. The other is this is all a cover to slash Medicare. When I was preparing my entry on Obamacare, I noticed that Obama often railed against how much entitlements took up of the federal budget. He came across to me as your typical whining conservative pol who saw every dollar going to entitlements as one less he could spend on important stuff like stupid, unnecessary wars or aid for banksters.
archival purposes? archival purposes?
those scandals are not history yet! :]
thanks for the link.
Call Harry R and tell him to make the Republicans actually conduct a filibuster. Change the Senate Rules (50 plus1) to limit debate to the bill in question. Let the Republicans plus Joe L shut down the Senate.
Why stop there? The executives in financial services industry sucked up all the profits for years and then stuck taxpayers with the bill – in the form of bailouts – when their stupidity nearly caused a collapse.
To all the morons whining about socialism: The executives in financial services industry have given us socialism. They privatized profits while socializing the results of their stupid risks.
I don’t know if this is o/t or not, but crooksandliars has a story about fundraising is down for Blue Dogs.
wow. oldnslow and I have discussed this as a possibility
does that make us “shrill” or “tiresome” ?
he did that even before november
an am post here at the Lake
i don’t think so. but that may be because i don’t have a shrill meter. *g*
imo it is a very real possibility. this bill does NOTHING to control total costs — in fact according to the CMS report jon linked to, total costs will be somewhat higher (the cms report is based on the tricommittee version of hr 3200).
re a state based opt-out. scarecrow has explained why that would further weaken any po:
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/8870
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/9592
oh, and p.s. to jon:
very serious request, actually begging, please stop calling any of the current po’s under consideration “robust.” the po has already been weakened almost beyond recognition and as you have pointed out dems and progressives risk serious public blow back by over-hyping the po.
recommend changing title of post to, for example, “further weakening public option is a double slap….
We are worse off than when we started. There is still continued talk about paying for health care, and that really needs to end. If we continuously grasp at tiny straws as though vast sequoias, we will get the tiny straw and a nice rogering to boot.
I appreciate what you are saying, but you are saying this on a site with the loudest voice on health care in the United States. The whole world is watching us tear and claw our way up past third world status. Our impoverished enemy Cuba has better health care for our own people than we offer them. Compromises of mindset are not productive.
We are going to remove Harry Reid from office, that much is clear now. He won’t attract any voters for screwing us, so he is gone. When he is gone, we lose Joe and the other pencil pushing lobbyists because they will have to get up off the toilet and work.
Jon, it is not enough to get a complete public plan. The people are controlling the game until we get the law written for the people and not the machine that would like to write the law. I appreciate your perceived grasp upon reality, but it is not helpful to give up anything prior to the fact.
We now know numerous democratic congresspeople that will not be reelected because you have their names and the folks at FDL now have the who on the death squad members. Congress can’t whip them, but we can.
I only have an hour or so a day to contact people on this matter. I will never stand for these people being re elected if they are trying to kill us. Print the info that we need to destroy their chances of remaining democrats, and watch our smoke.
There is no choice and no options in this bill. It is garbage, and it further impoverishes the poorest Americans while NO one at the top must suffer the indignity of paying a penny more tax.
This is no time for complacency, nor is it time to believe that our houses of congress are finished hearing from us. Get on the phones and rip them a new one. Don’t stop until you get someone willing to take down what you say verbatim. Make these people work their asses off to earn the bribes they take. Never forget that they are subject to the people, and the people are putting their millions of tiny feet on the necks of anyone that stands in our way.
*shot of one of the droids in Silent Running tapping his foot*
Who are these people, and what are they on? Is their medical coverage giving them drugs to muddle then mind? Or is there so much bad stuff ala Hoover on each and every one of them that they cannot resist?
How can such consistency ignoring the public be so endemic to the region? Don’t they even hesitate and say “wait a minute” when faced with such disparities in coverage vs cost vs plan? Then act rationally on it?
Christ almighty!
thanks yeah, [sigh] just saw that…Being a Californian means you’re always three hours late.
yikes! that’s a scary thought. just might work to make me remember too. thanks, good work!
See me at #13.
Liarman is a pro at leveraging any given situation, regardless of issue or content, to get perks, power, attn and bucks. His position is always dictated by leverage, not principle or benefits to anyone else. IOW, it’s a game and nothing more.
completely OT:
a very nice, and imo important, series of posts (macro econ, post-keynesian MMT variety) at naked capitalism:
Guest Post: Debate on Deficits
Debate on Deficits: A Reply from Rob Parenteau
All Debt is Not Created Equal: Government Debt is NOT the Same as Private Debt
the last one was just posted this morning.
Amazing to note the rising call for public option in ND this morning on talk radio… pastors, doctors, patients…. This one has legs. Which Senators would ignore at their peril.
The problem is they don’t see it as peril. They really believe that the money they get from corporations translates directly into votes, that the ads that money buys will be enough to overcome any challenge. In 2010 we need to show them the fallacy of that line of thought. A couple who really get hammered and thrown out of office might, repeat might, wake some others up.
Insurance is out of reach for many Americans and a mandate is not going to change that. The only thing that will help is drastically reduced monthly payments.
It now costs between $250 and $650 per month to insure a healthy young adult, losing her parent’s insurance coverage. I know, I’ve been researching costs for my daughter, age 23. She moved to NYC after graduating this year, living hand to mouth, with bunch of roommates, working a patchwork quilt of unpaid internships and low-pay part-time or short-time (3-4 month) positions in film industry. We can’t afford to pay insurance for her, and there is nothing she can afford, what with college loan payments to start next month, and basic food, rent & transportation. Especially since the lower-cost plans cover little or nothing until you’ve already spent between $1200 and $3000 on your own (and that doesn’t include the premiums).
How young families who don’t get employer coverage manage to be covered, I have no idea.
Americans desperately need an administration and Congress that understands the dire straits that many in the middle and lower-middle income quintiles are in. We need more jobs, higher wages, more job security, and some kind of guaranteed minimum health insurance for those who are struggling, but still earn or own too much to be covered by Medicaid.
This latest move by Lieberman is infuriating, but I expected no less of him. I did, however, expect a heck of a lot more fight from Obama on this issue.
Jane has a fresh cross-post available: “Is Blanche Lincoln Against Taxpayer-Funded Insurance For Big Ag, Too?”
Taken one at a time, yes you can see their bias. But the majority of Congress as a whole? Or is it hole?
“this is all a cover to slash Medicare. When I was preparing my entry on Obamacare, I noticed that Obama often railed against how much entitlements took up of the federal budget. He came across to me as your typical whining conservative pol who saw every dollar going to entitlements as one less he could spend on important stuff like stupid, unnecessary wars or aid for banksters.”
BINGO! I’ve been saying this for months. If you follow the money in Obama’s plan, the savings come out of Medicare and transferring the cost of the uninsured from industry and government back to the public. It is nothing but a backdoor entitlement cut.
“t. r. reid said that the po was used as a bargaining chip to get the insurance companies to agree to community rating, gauranteed issue, etc”
This is not correct. The plan Obama is proposing is almost identical to a plan that health insurers have been trying to get passed for years. Everything in it makes them more money. I first heard about it when I worked at one of these companies. When I saw Obama’s plan I was like, OMG! It’s the SAME plan!
More than 20 of the Democrats on that list are from very strong Democratic Districts. I wish the people in those Districts all knew about this. They could call up and give their opinion.
http://jwalkerreport.blogspot.com/2009/10/whip-count-data-removed-by-hill.html
http://www.progressivepunch.org/members.jsp?chamber=House
Okaaayyyyy . . . so the fascists have been in charge of healthcare since, ohhh 1946, and the Prez isn’t moving fast enuf for some posters here . . .
Geeeejuhzusfuhhhkinchrist, people, smoke somethin’ will ya and slow down a bit, or have a glass of wine or whateverrrrr — give the guy a break!
The Prez likes to take the 3-pointers, so chill. We’re gonna get there — stop sounding like the kiddies over at Fauxnewz, all the time whining and peeing in their pants.
Jane, I love ya, but you gotta go long sometimes.
i live in MA. i agree, it’s almost the same plan. when (what year) did you first hear about it? thanks!
Yes it is beautiful. Besides, we all know that cold makes you more liberal.